On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:40 AM, Graham Cobb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Monday 05 May 2008 12:42:33 Niels Breet wrote: > > Do we need a separate extras repository for diablo or should we just add a > > link to chinook? > > I strongly believe they need to be separate.
Hi Considering the current situation I think that having separate repositories is be the best thing to do. specially if you want to support the 770. The real problem is that as user I will not understand all the differences between the repositories. and as developer I really hope that all libs will be compiled for all the targets (or not be accepted). IMHO it might be fair to EOL it2007 or even it2008.1 if there is a compatible alternative. specially if the upgrade is apt-get dist-upgrade compatible. > > The main reason isn't from the point of view of Diablo, it is from the point > of view of Chinook. The issue isn't whether chinook apps will work on diablo > (and it is good news that they will) -- it is whether diablo apps will work > on chinook! > > If there are *any* library changes (you mentioned libssl but I *really* hope > there will be an up to date version of glib!) then apps built for Diablo will > not work on Chinook. So, you have the problem that users still running > chinook will find that apps in the chinook repository will not install! This is hell , but it currently is also pretty easy to install a wrong repository. > But the autobuilder makes this irrelevant. Developers can submit the exact > same source package to both autobuilders if they want to (the submission > assistant can even do it automatically for you by default). And you can > initially populate the diablo repository (even before anyone outside Nokia > has a diablo device) just by running the autobuilder on all the source > packages in the chinook repository (and, if you could automate sending any > failures to the maintainer from the package that would be even better!). Yes, having source is definitely a + > > In fact, the autobuilder actually makes it impossible to make a single > repository work in the future: it becomes impossible for me to deliberately > build my "diablo" software against chinook libraries or against old libraries > of other community packages. For example, if library libAAA links against > libssl then the autobuilder would insist on building a version which won't > run on chinook (presumably Nokia does not allow a chinook package to upgrade > libssl), but if I was building it myself I would build it against the chinook > version so it could run on both. I do this today for gregale: the gregale > version of GPE is deliberately built against the 3.0 SDK (not 3.2, where > the "gregale" codename points). sounds fair to me greetings _______________________________________________ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
